MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mall Walking Program For Stroke Survivors : Can It Help Combat Post-Stroke Social Isolation?

2017· other· en· W6965011552 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationStroke (engine)Work (physics)Social life

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

D. Schreiber1, J. Jukes2, D. Pal1, D. Mackay2.1March of Dimes Canada, Research and Quality, Toronto, Canada.2March of Dimes Canada, Community Engagement and Integration Services, Toronto, Canada.Abstract TextWhile social isolation and loneliness prior to a stroke can lead to poorer outcomes, the impact of social isolation after a stroke can be just as devastating. As stroke can affect physical and cognitive function, eating, swallowing, language, and speech, it can be difficult for stroke survivors to interact with friends/families and to take part in activities they once enjoyed.Next Steps is a weekly mall walking program specifically geared towards stroke survivors. It evolved from a stroke rehabilitation walking program delivered by rehabilitation therapists as a short-term program to reintroduce people to physical activity in the community post-stroke. The rehabilitation therapists identified a need for an ongoing community program to transition the stroke survivors into and partnered with non-profit organizations to deliver Next Steps. The majority of participants are referred to Next Steps from a stroke recovery program or rehabilitation centre.Participants in the program were surveyed to evaluate both their improvement since starting the program as well as their satisfaction with the program. While the most common reasons cited for joining Next Steps was to increase physical activity, stamina, and strength, the greatest improvement participants identified was increased social activity. Results from a thematic analysis of the survey responses prominently outline the significance of the program's social aspects. Increased social activity, community engagement, independence, and confidence will be explored in the presentation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library)Same topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207